Skip to content

· Private foundation

John M Kalny II Charitable Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$15k
Granted FY2024still arriving
15
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Environment$20kHealth$13kCrime & Legal$11kInternational$7kAnimals$5kCivil Rights$4kHuman Services$4kArts & Culture$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$239k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MARBRIDGE FOUNDATION INC$2,000
ZILKER BOTANICAL GARDEN CONSERVANCY$1,074
EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE$1,000
AUSTIN PETS ALIVE$1,000
THE TREVOR PROJECT INC$1,000
INNOCENCE PROJECT$1,000
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND$1,000
NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC$1,000
HEALTH ALLIANCE FOR AUSTIN MUSICIANS$1,000
KIVA MICROFUNDS$1,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND$1,000
INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT$1,000
NATIONAL POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT$1,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$500
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC$500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY22–24, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 43% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%INNOCENCE PROJECT: $1k → 17%INNOCENCE PROJECT: $1k → 17%INNOCENCE PROJECT: $1k → 17%MARBRIDGE FOUNDATION INC: $2k → 10%MARBRIDGE FOUNDATION INC: $2k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
OR
CA
VA
DC
LA
AL
TX
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$62k · 18 repeat orgs$500 to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
1

Total granted

$62k
$500

Still filing today

94%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCivil RightsHuman ServicesHealthAnimalsMembership BenefitOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    5× · 2020–2024 · $5k · revenue +121%
  • AP
    AUSTIN PETS ALIVE INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $5k · revenue +112%
  • MF
    MARBRIDGE FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $4k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • TN
    THE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF ILLINOIS
    one grant, 2022 · $500
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
3
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
4
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
5
Federation for American Immigration Reform

The federation for american immigration reform's (fair) mission is to educate the public about the economic, sociological, environmental, demographic and other effects of mass immigration to the united states.

International
6
Earthjustice

Earthjustice is a premier nonprofit public interest environmental law organization. we wield the power of law and the strength of partnership to protect people's health, to preserve magnificent places and wildlife, to advance clean energy,…

Environment
7
National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).

Environment
8
Target Als Foundation Inc

Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…

Education
9
Conservation Law Foundation Inc

Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…

Environment
10
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
11
Waterkeeper Alliance Inc

To protect our right to clean water in communities around the world.

Environment
12
Nia Tero Foundation

Nia tero works alongside indigenous peoples to secure their guardianship of vital ecosystems. indigenous peoples are guardians of earth.(see schedule o)

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is International Refugee Assistance Project Inc; the most unlike its peers is National Police Accountability Project Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 21 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
15/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $5,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INC…WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $4,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INCNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $3,500 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUN…ZILKER BOTANICAL GARDEN CONSERVANCY NON-PROFIT CORPORATION: $3,433 · EnvironmentZILKER BOTANICAL GARDEN CONSER…AMERICAN RIVERS INC: $2,000 · EnvironmentAMERICAN RIVERS INCEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $5,000 · Civil RightsEQUAL JUSTICE INITIAT…TREVOR PROJECT INC: $4,000 · Civil RightsTREVOR PROJECT INCNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC: $4,000 · Civil RightsNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE &…MARBRIDGE FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesMARBRIDGE FOUNDATI…INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesINTERNATIONAL REFU…THE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $3,000 · Human ServicesTHE INNOCENCE PROJ…UO FOUNDATIONSCHOOL OF MUSIC AND DANCE: $2,730 · OtherUO FOUNDATIONSCHOOL OF…THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $2,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF ILLINOIS: $500 · OtherKIVA MICROFUNDS: $3,000 · OtherKIVA MICROFUNDSHILARITY FOR CHARITY INC: $2,000 · OtherHILARITY FOR CHARITY I…HEARING HEALTH FOUNDATION: $1,000 · OtherHEARING HEALTH FOUNDAT…ARRAY ALLIANCE INC: $2,000 · OtherARRAY ALLIANCE INCAUSTIN PETS ALIVE INC: $5,000 · AnimalsHealth Alliance for Austin Musicians: $4,000 · Membership BenefitNATIONAL POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT INC: $3,000 · Crime & Legal
Environment$17,933Civil Rights$13,000Human Services$11,000Other$13,230Animals$5,000Membership Benefit$4,000Crime & Legal$3,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAUSTIN PETS ALIVE INC: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetMARBRIDGE FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHealth Alliance for Austin Musicians: $4,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $4,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTREVOR PROJECT INC: $4,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT INC: $4,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC: $4,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $3,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetZILKER BOTANICAL GARDEN CONSERVANCY NON-PROFIT CORPORATION: $3,433 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetKIVA MICROFUNDS: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHILARITY FOR CHARITY INC: $2,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetARRAY ALLIANCE INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN RIVERS INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $2,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHEARING HEALTH FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN10× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization John M Kalny II Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from John M Kalny II Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to John M Kalny II Charitable Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to John M Kalny II Charitable Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 21 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on John M Kalny II’s filings →

    More from the funding graph